Cory's MBA Blog

Labor unions have played a major role in shaping the American workplace. From wage protections to workplace safety, their historical impact is undeniable. One of the clearest advantages of unions is improved compensation. Research consistently shows that union members earn higher wages and receive better benefits compared to non-union workers. This is demonstrated in states with right-to-work laws, which prohibit labor unions and employers from requiring workers to pay union dues as a condition of employment. Workers in right-to-work states make about $6,109 less per year than workers in states without such laws (Kasperkevic, 2017). Unions also contribute to safer working conditions and provide stronger protections against unfair treatment. Furthermore, unions enhance economic stability by strengthening the middle class and improving workers’ long-term financial security (Banerjee, Poydock, McNicholas, Mangundayao, & Sait, 2021).

Unions improve overall employee well-being by providing formal processes for grievances, arbitration, and protection against wrongful termination. These structures offer representation and a collective voice in workplace decisions (Stevenson, 2018).

Despite these advantages, unions are not without drawbacks. Membership often involves dues, standardized work rules, and reduced individual flexibility. From an employer perspective, unions can increase labor costs and make it more difficult to restructure or reward high performers. Larger unions may also exert significant political influence, which can create tension among members with differing political beliefs.

I spoke with a friend whose experience as a floor nurse reflected many of these tensions. She directly benefited from higher wages and the added security that came with union protection and appreciated having support in the event of a conflict with management. However, she also witnessed situations where employees were given more chances than they should have been because HR and management felt constrained by the union contract. Political pressure was another concern. There was an expectation that union members should vote a certain way, which created a sense that workers were being pushed into supporting political causes they did not align with.

Despite these challenges, I would join a union if the opportunity were available. I believe that unions serve as an important counterbalance to corporate power and provide employees with protections, fair representation, and a collective voice that might otherwise be difficult to achieve in the workplace.

Kasperkevic, Jana. Why unions are so worried about right-to-work lawsLinks to an external site.. MarketPlace. February 24, 2017

Banerjee, Asha; Poydock, Margaret; McNicholas, Celine; Mangundayao, Ihna; & Sait, Ali. (2021, December 15). Unions and Well-Being. Economic Policy Institute. https://www.epi.org/publication/unions-and-well-being/

Stevenson, M. (2018, August 14). Pros and Cons of Labor Unions. HR Exchange Network. https://www.hrexchangenetwork.com/hr-compensation-benefits/articles/pros-and-cons-of-labor-unions

After completing the three assessments this week, I realized how much I’ve changed since my husband passed away nine years ago. The death of a spouse is considered the most stressful life event, and it completely shifted my perspective. Before then, I believed I had a low tolerance for stress and structured my life to avoid feeling overwhelmed. After losing him, I learned that most stressors simply don’t compare, and everyday stress no longer feels unmanageable. My score of 415 on the “My Life Stress Questionnaire” placed me at high risk for illness or accident due to stress, but that number doesn’t fully reflect the context of my life today.

Raising four kids as a single parent, managing a young child at home while sending another off to college, continuing to build a career I’m proud of, and getting engaged this past year have all brought significant change, but much of it has been positive. Even the difficult parts, like taking over financial and medical care for my mom as she faces Alzheimer’s, have reminded me how fortunate I am to be able to support her. Despite the many stressors in my life, I am genuinely the happiest I’ve been in years, and I don’t take that for granted.

The Coping & Stress Management Skills Test showed that I rely mostly on problem-focused strategies for coping. I tend to face stress directly by trying to solve what’s in front of me. While this approach works for practical challenges, I’ve also learned that not everything can be controlled. Grief, uncertainty, and life transitions sometimes require acceptance rather than action. In those moments, I’ve learned to lean on my widow community, who continues to be an important source of support.

The Type A Personality Test reassured me that although I may become impatient or frustrated when overwhelmed, I am “characterized by warmth and tolerance the majority of the time.” Prioritizing trusting relationships also reduces the health risks typically associated with Type A tendencies. Still, it reminded me to stay intentional about maintaining emotional and physical balance moving forward.

What Employers Are Doing to Support Employee Stress

Organizations are increasingly recognizing how significantly stress impacts employees. Many are expanding wellness initiatives and training managers to identify burnout and respond with empathy rather than discipline. Employees are also placing greater value on benefits such as flexible schedules, remote work opportunities, and additional paid time off. All these options are shown to improve work–life balance and reduce stress. According to “The Most Desirable Employee Benefits,” these offerings are often relatively low cost for employers, and workers are even willing to trade higher pay for them. Shifting toward treating employees as whole people and not just labor resources is becoming essential for performance, retention, and overall well-being.

Life Stress Questionnaire

Coping and Stress Management Skills Test https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/tests/career/coping-stress-management-skills-test

Type A Personality Survey 

https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/tests/personality/type-personality-test

Jones, Kerry. The Most Desirable Employee Benefits. Harvard Business Review Digital Access. April 15, 2017, 2-6

My fiancé previously worked for a construction company founded and owned by an individual who held the title of CEO but operated largely as a passive investor. He was frequently away on vacation and minimally involved in day-to-day operations. The company’s success rested almost entirely on two key leaders: his brother, Adam, the Director of Construction, and my fiancé, John, the Senior Project Manager. Adam served as the primary estimator and secured nearly 90 percent of the company’s projects, while John managed and delivered most of those projects. Both were highly respected in their community, and their combined expertise was central to generating approximately $12 million in annual revenue.

A major contributor to the company’s strong performance was its incentive structure. The bonus program was substantial, often providing employees like John with year-end compensation equal to half their annual salary and sometimes matching it entirely in exceptional years. This system aligned employee effort with organizational success, motivating long hours, high standards, and an ownership mindset. Consistent with the principles outlined in “On the Folly of Rewarding A, While Hoping for B,” the company’s incentive system effectively rewarded the outcomes it desired. Under this model, the business grew steadily, maintained an excellent reputation, and benefited from enduring employee commitment.

This equilibrium collapsed when the largely uninvolved CEO reconsidered profit distribution. After more than two decades of benefiting from a business he did not actively manage, he decided he wanted a larger share of the returns. Determining that Adam was overcompensated, he reduced Adam’s salary despite his central role in securing work and sustaining revenue. The decision revealed a significant disconnect between leadership’s perception of value creation and the reality of who was driving the company’s success. As highlighted in “Most People Have No Idea Whether They’re Paid Fairly,” compensation is more than a number; it is an emotional signal of how valued employees feel by their employer. Feeling devalued and undermined, Adam left the company and John left with him.

The consequences were swift and severe. Within two years, the company experienced pronounced operational decline, laid off half its workforce, and lost the reputation for quality construction that had distinguished it in the region. The departure of these two pivotal leaders was far more than a staffing issue; it represented the loss of institutional knowledge, client confidence, and operational continuity. Without them, the business was unable to maintain its standards or secure comparable levels of work.

This situation illustrates that compensation is not simply an HR cost, it is a strategic mechanism for retaining the capability, trust, and motivation that underpin organizational performance. When leadership prioritizes short-term profits over equitable and well-designed incentive structures, the damage to employee trust and organizational capacity can destabilize the entire enterprise.

Kerr, S., (1977) Folly of Rewarding A While Hoping for B, Academy of Management Executive

Smith, D. (2015). Most people have no idea whether they’re paid fairly. Harvard Business Review

Reflecting on two very different onboarding experiences in my career, one nearly nonexistent and the other highly structured, helped me recognize just how critical managerial experience and clear guidance are to an employee’s success and engagement.

In my previous position, onboarding was essentially nonexistent. I was given tasks with little to no instruction, and when I asked questions, I was met with frustration and annoyance due to the interruption. Eventually, my manager restricted me to asking questions at only one meeting during the day, yet my work couldn’t continue without critical information. I was encouraged to take the initiative to troubleshoot my own problem-solving but then criticized when my solutions didn’t align with the “only correct” answer. Ultimately, the problem stemmed from my manager’s lack of experience in leadership combined with my lack of experience in the role. According to HBR’s “Your New Hires Won’t Succeed Unless You Onboard Them Properly,” the experience of managers plays a critical role in the adjustment of newly hired employees, noting that “supervisors can promote or inhibit newcomer adjustment through their supportive or obstructive behaviors.”

By contrast, in my current position, I was trained by a manager with extensive experience who provided clear instruction and consistent support during my transition. She encouraged questions, ensured that I understood my responsibilities, and helped me develop confidence and job clarity early on. Because of that strong foundation, I became self-sufficient much more quickly.

In my prior role, I was even expected to create standard operating procedures (SOPs) for tasks I didn’t yet understand. In my current role, those standardized steps were developed by management to support training and consistency. According to First, Break All the Rules, “Great managers know that it is their responsibility to ensure that their employees know these steps and can execute them perfectly.” That structured approach to training, combined with supportive leadership, made all the difference in how effective and beneficial the onboarding process was.

With the high cost of turnover, investing in effective onboarding and training is an important consideration for every company. These two contrasting experiences taught me that strong onboarding practices ultimately benefit both employees and organizations by building competence, confidence, and long-term success.

Ellis, A., Nifadkar, S., Bauer, T., and Erdogan, B. (2017). Your New Hires Won’t Succeed Unless You Onboard Them Properly. Harvard Business Review Digital Articles 

Buckingham, M. & Coffman, C. 2016. First, Break All the Rules: what the World’s Greatest Managers Do Differently.

Throughout my career, I have only participated in unstructured interviews, which tend to vary widely in their effectiveness. One example was for a scholarship for the graduate program at Oregon State University. I met with the interviewer one-on-one, and she asked conversational, open-ended questions about my past experience and future career plans. According to “7 Practical Ways to Reduce Bias in Your Hiring Process” (Knight, 2017), this style of allowing a candidate’s experience and expertise to unfold organically can feel natural but is often unreliable for predicting job success and allows more bias to influence hiring decisions. Structured interviews, by contrast, minimize bias by focusing on specific factors that directly impact performance.

The company I currently work for also used an unstructured approach when hiring me. I applied for the position even though I lacked the technical experience they were initially seeking. I met with a panel of top management who mainly described the role’s responsibilities rather than asking competency-based questions. According to “How to Take the Bias Out of Interviews” (Bohnet, 2016), managers should avoid group interviews because “if you have four interviewers, four data points from four individual interviews trump one data point from one collective interview.” Despite the process’s low reliability and validity, the decision ultimately proved successful. The company took a chance, and over time, I have grown into my role and far exceeded the original expectations for the position.

Looking back, I believe both interviews could have been more effective if structured, evidence-based methods had been used. Structured interviews make it easier to identify whether a candidate’s natural talents align with the role and the organization’s culture. As “First, Break All the Rules” (Buckingham & Coffman, 2014) explains, the best hiring decisions come from recognizing a person’s strengths rather than focusing solely on experience. If my interviewers had used structured questions or work-sample tests, they would have gained a clearer picture of my abilities and potential. They also would have seen my willingness to learn, which “How to Get a Job at Google” (Friedman, 2014) notes is often a stronger predictor of future success than past experience. A more structured approach would have helped the interviewers make more informed decisions and given me a better opportunity to demonstrate my potential.

Friedman, T. (2014). How to get a job at Google. The New York Times.

Bohnet, I. (2016). How to take the bias out of interviews. Harvard Business Review.

Buckingham, M., & Coffman, C. (2014). First, break all the rules: What the world’s greatest managers do differently.

Knight, R. (2017). 7 practical ways to reduce bias in your hiring process. SHRM.

The last time I reviewed the job description for my position was prior to applying for the role. Since that time, my responsibilities have expanded exponentially, yet my official job description has not evolved to reflect these changes. While my company reviews most job descriptions annually, upper management positions are excluded from that process. According to the article “Job Worth Doing: Update Descriptions,” this oversight poses a legitimate legal risk for organizations. The article warns that “if you have a measure of performance that doesn’t appear on the job description and you have a case brought against you, depending on the agency [involved], there could be punishment” (Tyler, 2013).

This situation is common across many organizations, where job descriptions often lag behind the actual scope of employees’ responsibilities. A natural opportunity to update them arises during the hiring process. Step 2 of Hiring Top Executives: A Comprehensive End-to-End Process from HBR’s “Definitive Guide to Recruiting” is: Specify the Job. Having a current, relevant, and detailed job description that clearly outlines the necessary skills and experience is a crucial element of effective recruitment (Fernández-Aráoz, Groysberg, & Nohria, 2009).

However, rather than updating job descriptions only when hiring, they should be treated as living documents rather than static forms. As “Job Worth Doing: Update Descriptions” emphasizes, “updating job descriptions should be an ongoing process anytime something significant changes” (Tyler, 2013). Linking this process to annual performance evaluations could help maintain both accuracy and engagement. Additionally, granting employees and managers shared ownership and access to job descriptions could streamline the process and promote accountability, as maintaining accurate job descriptions should be a shared responsibility among employees, managers, and HR.

This participatory approach would not only ensure that documented responsibilities align with real duties but also validate employees’ evolving contributions to the organization. When employees can demonstrate that they are exceeding the expectations outlined in their job descriptions, it creates an opportunity for a constructive conversation about advancement and how the organization can better leverage their skills and education (Tyler, 2013).

After reflecting on this, I plan to update my own job description and bring it into the discussion during my upcoming end-of-year performance review.

Tyler, K. (2013, January 1). Job worth doing: Update descriptions. HR Magazine.

Fernández-Aráoz, C., Groysberg, B., & Nohria, N. (2009). The definitive guide to recruiting in good times and bad. Harvard Business Review, 87(5), 74–84

In this week’s reading, Gallup researchers identify twelve questions that measure the health of a workplace by examining how employees experience their roles. Those questions uncover whether employees have clarity and resources, receive recognition and support, form meaningful relationships, and have opportunities for growth, all while connecting daily work to the organization’s larger mission. A central theme is that managers are the single most influential factor shaping how employees answer these questions.

The order of the twelve questions matters: employees must first feel confident in their day-to-day work before they can meaningfully connect to a company’s culture and purpose. The Fortune 100 Best Companies to Work For® 2025 rankings illustrate this progression. At Walmart (100), only 77% of employees reported having the resources they needed. At Panda Restaurant Group (51), that figure rose to 91%, though fewer employees reported feeling welcome. At the top of the list, Hilton achieved exceptional results: 98% of employees said they felt welcome upon joining, and 96% said they were treated as full members regardless of position. These findings demonstrate that meeting basic needs is the foundation for deeper engagement and satisfaction.

HR plays a critical, strategic role in making this possible. Robust systems for onboarding, training, and development equip managers to support employees effectively. Supportive managers create environments in which employees thrive; disengaged managers can undermine satisfaction and performance even among talented staff.

Google’s research echoes these ideas and identifies eight criteria for effective managers, including being a good coach, avoiding micromanagement, communicating well, and articulating a clear vision and strategy. Because these behaviors are action-oriented, poor managers cannot simply “fake” them and consistent practice is required.

As the article Why Did We Ever Go Into HR suggests, HR blends psychology, organizational behavior, and hard-core finance. As a future manager, I aspire to integrate those three components: ensuring individuals have the resources to perform, recognizing and valuing contributions, and aligning people strategies with organizational goals. The most difficult part of this role will be balancing each employee’s unique needs with the company’s broader objectives and financial constraints. Finding that equilibrium requires ongoing attention and adaptability, but when employees thrive, they bring innovation, loyalty, and pride that strengthen the organization.

Ultimately, employee satisfaction doesn’t happen by chance; it is the product of intentional management practices and HR systems that consistently put people first.

Buckingham, Marcus, and Curt W Coffman. First, Break All the Rules : What the World’s Greatest Managers Do Differently, Gallup Press, 2014.

Garvin, D. A. (2013). How Google Sold Its Engineers on Management. Harvard Business Review, 91(12), 74-82.

Breitfelder, M. D., & Dowling, D. W. (2008). Why Did We Ever Go Into HR? Harvard Business Review, 86(7/8), 39-43.